Le mardi 25 novembre 2008 à 17:36 +0000, Richard Hughes a écrit : > On 11/25/08, Josselin Mouette <joss debian org> wrote: > > It is also very unlikely that Debian embraces PackageKit as long as its > > target feature set is stick to the RPM capabilities. > > Please don't spread FUD, it's just not true. Please do some research > before making ridiculous claims like that. That’s no more FUD than what you said about Debian tools [0], so let’s say it’s a misunderstanding to remain polite. > At the moment, PackageKit > works with apt, alpm, box, conary, opkg, pisi, poldek, smart, urpmi, > yum and zypp. It even has functionality that cannot work with rpm and > yum, so this really isn't an RPM focused thing... Supporting APT is one thing, but supporting what other APT frontends do is another one. As long as you restrict the feature set to the lowest common denominator, my remark holds. Currently it deliberately violates our policies despite all attempts at discussing it, and it would be kept out of the testing branch as soon as it is uploaded. > > After discussing > > this issue with Ubuntu maintainers, I think the same will probably hold > > for Ubuntu since we pretty much agreed. > > Err, PackageKit is currently planned to be shipped in Ubuntu. I'm not > sure who you talked to, but there are developers working on converting > gnome-app-install and the Ubuntu update viewer to using the PackageKit > API. Maybe the GNOME Ubuntu maintainers changed their plans recently; if that’s the case, I’d have liked to discuss about it, but I can’t say it comes as a surprise it wasn’t the case… > > Furthermore, Synaptic is already integrated in totem (through > > gnome-app-install) > > That's not integration. Any time you're running a separate GTK > application as root it's _fail-o-clock_ time. I do not deny the application design of PackageKit is orders of magnitude better. Still, that doesn’t make it any better in terms of features. > Even better, join the PackageKit mailing list, and ask questions there. As I already stated, I have much interest into bringing PackageKit to a level where it is usable for Debian. I’ve joined the mailing list even though I’m too busy to follow all of it. However, the hostility I have encountered so far is not encouraging. I don’t think Debian currently has the resources to maintain a full fork after the necessary code has been written. [0] http://wiki.debian.org/PackageKit Cheers, -- .''`. : :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code. `. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to `- our own. Resistance is futile.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=